Saturday, 25 June 2016

16
comments:

I would presume that if there were some concessions from the EU then a second referendum would be called and it would go the other way (IIRC Ireland/Lisbon treaty was along those lines). But, instead the EU seems keen to get us out ASAP. I wonder why.

"The author of the petition, William Oliver Healey, says the Government should re-stage the referendum because the winning vote for Leave was less than 60 per cent and was based on a turnout of less than 75 per cent. "

The vote for a Scottish parliament was 74% on a 60% turnout, ie 45% of the electorate, can we wind that one back too?

The vote for a Wales assembly was 50% on a 50% turnout, ie 25% of the electorate, can we wind that one back too?

The weak spot is if there were a General Election soon, and all those northern Leave voters vote tribally for Labour as they usually do, Labour being a very pro-EU party (well, their MPs are anyway), then we could end up staying in.

SM, Mr Healey appears to be invoking an existing rule. If that is the case, how come no-one has mentioned it before now. If it is not the case, then the new rule would have to be retrospective to have any point, in which case, it would affect the Scottish and Welsh referendums, too. In any case, it would be a stupid rule to introduce, because there is the possibility of of an infinite number of referendums under it.

It looks to me like the immediate claims of vote rigging brought up by the losing side in every third world election.

It would appear we have a number of fifth columnists amongst our midst led by Quisling Healey.Perhaps a culling is called for here?It should be very easy to round-up the suspects using the details given to sign said petition. Midnight knock on their front doors, quick trial and summary dispatch all before dawn should sort this crying over spilt milk/toys-out-of-the-pram episode.Of course any MP trying to introduce this into parliament could be added to the list.

On another note it appears very lax of the Electoral Commission not to have made sure that all voters were aware of this "rule"before we all voted on Thursday?

No, I have been searching around. There is no such rule. Nor could there be. Healey is a fool; he would be calling for the end of our Democracy. Plus a real chance of civil war in the north. The poll about London is a serous discussion point it seems to me. If that helps people see the realtionship like rich Singapore to poor Malaysia. All well and good.

The only 'rules' on the referendum are the laws setting out what date it was on, what the question would be etc. Other electoral laws - such as various kinds of voting frauds etc - would also apply.

IMO the referendum result is probably not legally binding on anyone. It is the job of the government to invoke Article 50 and Cameron has basically refused to have anything to do with it. The ECJ would have sole remit to decide if a referendum result could be construed as invoking Article 50, in the event the EU disagreed that the UK government has to do it. I doubt this would happen quickly as lawyers are good at dragging such things out.

It looks like Cameron won't be proposing any more new legislation to Parliament now. The tories will have a leadership election and Boris et al will have to set out their stance on these issues. Whether some kind of cross discipline / cross party negotiation group is set up is another question. And whether they would need the authority of Parliament or Cameron. But they would need the authority of one of them and probably both.

As for now, the PM is still a remainer and Parliament is still a remain majority. The tories might well elect a pro-remain leader. if labour have any sense whatsoever ( a long shot) they will remove Corby quickly, replace him with Dan Jarvis or Hilary Benn, and try to force a general election in the aftermath.

In the meantime the Scots Nats will try to seperate from the UK again.

I listened to Nicola Sturgeon announcement after her meeting of the Scottish cabinet at her official residence, Bute House in Edinburgh.

She was saying many of the things I would have liked to hear Quisling Cameroon saying, instead of his petulant resignation speech. Ms Sturgeon actually sounded as if she had a better grasp of the situation than the Quisling.

The Quislings performance reminds me very much of the new maritime tradition of sinking/run aground cruise ship Captains being the first ashore!

There can only three types of people voting on the petition to re run the referendum. The first obviously are disaffected Remainers. Sorry lads. You had your say and you lost. That's democracy for you. Tough isn't it? The second are those that voted Out and now wished they'd voted In. Sorry again lads, you should have made yourselves better informed. The third are those that didn't vote and now wish they had. These people are beneath contempt.